A judge today blasted an 18-year-old girl suing her parents for support after she ran away claiming they were behind her bulimia and that her father showed her 'inappropriate affection'
When Judge Peter Bogaard read an expletive-laden and vicious answerphone message left by Rachel Canning, from Lincoln Park, New Jersey, to her mother, Elizabeth, in which the girl said: 'I wanna s*** all over your face', he said: 'Have you ever in your experience seen such gross disrespect for a parent? I don’t see it in my house.’
The judge, sitting at Morris County court added that Rachel had given her mom and dad, Sean: ‘The proverbial f you’. He also warned he must consider the 'slippery slope' where 'we open the gates for a 12-year-old to sue for an Xbox, a 13-year-old to sue for an iPhone… what about a 15-year-old asking for a 60 inch TV?'
Rachel, who is suing her parents for ‘abandoning’ her has made sensational claims that her mom calling her ‘fat’ and ‘porky’ led to her suffering bulimia and that her former police chief father dad used to get her drunk and kiss her inappropriately.
In shocking legal documents submitted to the court, the honor-roll student said her parents’ behavior contributed to her developing an eating disorder at a young age and saw her weight plummet down to 92 pounds.
Rachel, who has two younger sisters moved in with the parents’ of a friend and is now suing for child support, medical bills, college expenses and legal fees.
She states that her parents have a combined yearly income of between $250,000 and $300,000 and she is entitled to $654-a-week in child support. Her parents have also refused to pay $6,000 owed in school fees for her Catholic High School.
Her parents claim their daughter ran off to stay with friends when she turned 18 because she refused to abide by rules they had set down, including to stop dating her boyfriend.
But today the judge clearly took a dim view of the lawsuit. He said: ‘What kind of parents would the Canning’s be if they didn’t try to set down some strict rules?
‘I’m not going to put myself in anyone’s shoes, he’s (father Sean) trying to raise a child. It’s clear to me all the positive qualities Rachel obviously has, in terms of sports and academics, but I’m not going to step on a father for how he tries to get his child on the right tracks when she has obviously come off the tracks, to put it mildly.’
When summing up later he denied all immediate financial claims, including monthly maintenance, private school payments and legal fees.
Summing up, Judge Bogaard said: ‘The court was called upon to find whether immediate financial relief was needed… It is not necessary….
'What is the next step? Will a 12-year-old sue over an x box, a 13-year-old sue for an iPhone... what about a 15-year-old asking for a 60-inch TV?'
- Judge Peter Bogaard
‘We have to ask ourselves, do we want to establish a precedent where parents live in constant fear of enforcing the basic rules of the house. If they set a rule a child doesn’t like, the child can move out, move in with another family, seek child support, cars, cell phone and a few hundred grand to go to college.
‘Counsel, also needs to ask themselves, what is the next step…. Are we going to open the gates for a 12-year-old to sue for an Xbox, a 13-year-old to sue for an iPhone… what about a 15-year-old asking for a 60 inch TV….
‘I want both counsels to think of the potential slippery slope here.’
He added: ‘I think everyone needs to take a step back and realize this family and Rachel in particular is well worth the effort to salvage or attempt to.
‘It appears more energy has been utilized at this point to tear apart this family than try to figure out how this family can somehow be brought back together.
‘I hope we all can realize that despite all the ups and downs, despite the somewhat severe trials and tribulations that have been brought in front of the court, that the basic concept that all the money in the world cannot match the greatest gift you can ever receive, the gift of a child.
‘You should never give up on a child even when they become a young adult.’
He set a date for the secondary hearing, but advised that the plaintiff had not provided sufficient evidence up until now to suggest she would win the case.
Rachel’s attorney Tanya Hefland hit back, saying: ‘They more than have the ability to pay. In the four months she has been with the Inglesino’s they have not called her, they have not offered a penny to her benefactors.
‘Any normal parent would be so embarrassed… they would reach out to the Inglesino’s to sort this situation out.
‘Mr Inglesino reached out twice to try to sort this out father to father and Mr Canning wasn’t interested.
‘They wanted her to move, they wanted her to fail, they wanted her out of that school. They didn’t care, they were more interested in saving their $6,000.
‘They have failed, they are not interested and it is abundantly clear. They call themselves loving parents… but paint the most disgusting image of their daughter. This is a pretty good kid in my opinion, but all they can do is bad mouth their child.’
Much more and pictures at link:
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2573165/My-mom-called-porky-dad-got-drunk-told-I-just-daughter-Explosive-claims-spoiled-cheerleader-18-suing-parents-support-ran-away.html#ixzz2v6UqWm5f
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook